JUDGMENT Hon’ble Arun Tandon, J.—Heard Counsel for the parties. 2. Committee of Management K. & E.M.V. Inter College, Atrauli, district Aligarh through its Manager has filed this writ petition against an order of the Secretary, Madhyamik Shiksha Parishad U.P., Allahabad dated 10.3.2003 whereby correction in the date of birth of Ramesh Chandra Verma respondent No. 4, as recorded in the High School Certificate of year 1981, has been directed as also against the consequential order issued by the District Inspector of Schools in that regard. 3. Under the impugned order the date of birth of Ramesh Chandra Verma, which was originally recorded as 6.7.1961 has been corrected to read as 6th July, 1953. Such correction in the date of birth by the Madhyamik Shiksha Parishad U.P., Allahabad is being challenged on the ground that the same is wholly without jurisdiction inasmuch as under Chapter-Ill, Regulation 7 of Part-ll-B of the Regulations framed under the Intermediate Education Act power to make corrections in the High School Examination Certificate issued by the Madhyamik Shiksha Parishad U.P., Allahabad has been conferred only for the purposes of making corrections in the clerical mistakes subject, however, to the condition that application in that regard must be made before the Principal/Centre Superintendent concerned along with a copy of the same being forwarded to the Secretary of the Madhyamik Shiksha Parishad U.P., Allahabad by registered post within two years of the date of issuance of the High School Certificate. For ready reference Regulation 7 of Chapter-Ill of Part 2-B of the regulations framed under the Intermediate Education Act is quoted herein below: Þ7- lfpo ifj’kn dh vksj ls lQy mEehnokjksa dks ifj’kn dh ijh{kk esa mÙkh.kZ gksus dk izek.k&i= fofgr izi= esa nsxk vkSj ckn esa mldh izfof’V;ksa esa dksbZ “kqf) djsxk] c”krsZ fd izek.k&i= esa fdlh ,slh xyr izfof’V] fdlh vfopkfjr fyfidh; Hkwy ;k yksi ds dkj.k ;k fdlh ,slh fyfidh; Hkwy ds dkj.k dh xbZ gks tks vlko/kkuh ls ifj’kn ds Lrj ds ;k ml laLFkk ds tgka ls vfUre ckj f”k{kk izkIr dh gks] Lrj ij vfHkys[k esa gks xbZ gksA ;g “kqf) lfpo }kjk mlh fLFkfr esa dh tk ldsxh tcfd vH;FkhZ us lEcfU/kr ijh{kk ds izek.k&i= dks ifj’kn }kjk fuxZeu djus dh frfFk ls nks o’kZ ds vUnj gh fyfidh; =qfV dh vksj /;ku vkÑ’V djrs gq, lEcfU/kr iz/kkukpk;Z@dsUnz O;oLFkkid dks =qfV ds la”kks/ku gsrq izkFkZuk&i= izLrqr dj fn;k gksa vkSj mldh izfr iathÑr Mkd ls lfpo] ifj’kn dks Hkh izsf’kr dh gksAß 4. Counsel for the petitioner submits that in the facts of the present case correction has been effected after 22 years of the issuance of the High School Certificate and therefore is wholly without jurisdiction. Even otherwise he points out that there was no clerical error in the issuance of the High School Certificate, which could be corrected under the said regulation. The Secretary, as a matter of fact, has made an attempt to re-assess the evidence qua the date of birth of Sri Ramesh Chandra Verma and has directed correction in alleged exercise of power under the aforesaid regulation, which does not confer any such power upon him. 5. Sri S. C. Pandey Advocate has filed a counter affidavit on behalf of the respondent No. 4. It has been stated on his behalf that an application for correction in the High School Certificate was made before the Principal of the institution namely Sri Behari Lal Bharti Inter College, Palimukeempur (Aligarh) as early as on 16.7.1983. However, no action was taken on his application, he therefore approached the Chief Minister of the State and it was on 8th May, 1999 that, on the representation made by the petitioner, the Public Relation Officer attached to the Chief Minister of the State of U.P. made a note for the Secretary, Madhyamik Shiksha Parishad U.P., Allahabad to make necessary correction in his certificate. The process took long and it was only on 25.3.2003 a letter was forwarded to the petitioner intimating the correction made in his certificate. 6. Since the corrections in the High School Certificate were made nearly after 22 years of the candidate having been issued High School Certificate, this Court required the Secretary of the Madhyamik Shiksha Parishad U.P., Allahabad to produce the original records on the basis whereof such corrections have been made. 7. The records produced today by the Secretary, Madhyamik Shiksha Parishad U.P., Allahabad reflect a very disturbing picture. On record is a report submitted by the Under Secretary dated 14th November, 2002 categorically recording that as per the record available with the Madhyamik Shiksha Parishad U.P., Allahabad, the date of birth recorded in the High School Certificate is correct. No application for correction in the High School Certificate has been received prior to 27.9.1999, on which date a letter from the office of the Joint Director of Education was received. The officer categorically reported that the application now received is hopefully barred by limitation and as per the records of the Board no correction in respect of the High School Certificate is called for in the facts also. 8. The Secretary at the relevant time on 11th November, 2002 made a remark that an enquiry be made from the student concerned with regard to examination, if any, under taken by him between 1970 to 1980. Thereafter there is a note of the Additional Secretary (Administration) dated 27.12.2005 categorically stating that as per the records of the Board the date of birth, as recorded in the High School Certificate dated 6th July, 1961, is correct. The Secretary, for the reasons best known to him, on 2.1.2003 made a note that the matter may be placed before the Examination Committee. 9. The Secretary, for the reasons best known to him, on 2.1.2003 made a note that the matter may be placed before the Examination Committee. 9. The Examination Committee on 3rd February, 2003 is alleged to have passed a resolution to the following effect: Þlfefr us lanfHkZr izdj.k ij laKku fy;k fd gkbZ Ldwy ijh{kk o’kZ 1981 ds ijh{kkFkhZ jes”kpUnz oekZ] vuqØekad 693816 orZeku esa fo|ky; ds ,.M ,e0 ch0 bUVj dkyst] vrjkSyh] vyhx<+ esa prqFkZ Js.kh ds in ij o’kZ 1968 ls dk;Zjr gSA mDr fo|ky; dh lsok iqfLrdk esa tUefrfFk 6-7-1953 vafdr gSA dkykUrj esa ijh{kkFkhZ us o’kZ 1981 esa gkbZ Ldwy ijh{kk gsrq vkosnu i= Hkjk vkSj ijh{kk mÙkh.kZ dj yhA gkbZLdwy ijh{kk esa ijh{kkFkhZ dh tUefrfFk 6-7-1961 vafdr gks x;hA ijh{kkFkhZ o’kZ 1968 ls prqFkZ Js.kh ds in ij dk;Zjr gSA vr% mldh tUefrfFk 7-7-1961 gksuk lEHko ugha gSA rnuqlkj ijh{kkFkhZ dh tUefrfFk esa vLokHkkfod =qfV ,oa fHkUurk gSA vr% lfefr us fu”p; fd;k fd ijh{kkFkhZ }kjk izLrqr tUefrfFk la”kks/ku lEcU/kh izkFkZuk&i= dks le; lhek esa NwV iznku djrs gq, ifj’kn vfHkys[kksa esa mldh tUefrfFk 6-7-1961 ds LFkku ij 6-7-1953 vafdr dj nh tk;sA rnuqlkj ijh{kkFkhZ dks la”kksf/kr izek.k&i= fuxZr fd;k tk;sA Ñi;k ijh{kk lfefr ds fu.kZ;kuqlkj rRdky ;FkkokafNr dk;Zokgh dh tk;sAß Accordingly, necessary corrections in the High School Certificate have been made in the year, 2003. 10. On record is an order of the Public Relation Officer of the Chief Minister of the State of U. P. dated 3.1.2003, which reads as follows: Þlfpo ek/;fed f”k{kk ifj’kn bykgkckn izkFkhZ ds izkFkZuk&i= dk voyksdu djrs gq, ;Fkk”kh?kz izkFkhZ dh tUefrfFk esa la”kks/ku djus dk d’V djsaAß There is an other noting on file which states that the matter pertains to a V.I.P. 11. From the records following facts emerge: (a) All the authorities of the Madhyamik Shiksha Parishad U.P., including the Secretary, were specifically informed that the application is hopelessly barred by limitation made nearly after 22 years of the High School Certificate being issued. It was repeatedly recorded that as per the records of the Madhyamik Shiksha Parishad the date of birth as recorded in the certificate is correct and needs no correction. 12. It was repeatedly recorded that as per the records of the Madhyamik Shiksha Parishad the date of birth as recorded in the certificate is correct and needs no correction. 12. The Secretary, in order to please the Public Relation Officer to the Chief Minister, proceeded to alter the procedure and instead of deciding the application himself, directed the same to be placed before the Examination Committee, which has nothing to do with the correction of date of birth of a candidate. 13. The Examination Committee in turn has proceeded to direct correction in the High School Certificate of Respondent No. 4 on the ground that the candidate was employed in an institution in the year 1968 and therefore there appears to be a mistake in the date of birth, which may be corrected to read as 6.7.1953, as according to the Examination Committee it was impossible that the date of birth of the petitioner would be 6th July, 1961. 14. Such a decision of the authorities of the Madhyamik Shiksha Parishad U.P., Allahabad is clearly in excess of their legal authority. From the regulation, quoted herein above, the only power conferred upon the Secretary of the Madhyamik Shiksha Parishad U.P., Allahabad is to make corrections in clerical mistakes in the certificate issued by the Parishad. Such mistakes must be borne out from the records of the Board/Institution. They have no authority to re-assess or redetermine the date of birth of a candidate who has appeared in the High School Examination. Clerical mistake for example may be (a) where the date of birth has been recorded in the High School Certificate contrary to the form submitted by the candidate (b) the Principal of the institution had made a mistake in forwarding the correct date of birth contrary to the students roll of the institution and of like nature. It was not the case of Sri Ramesh Chandra Verma that the date of birth mentioned in his application form was 6.7.1953 while the Board has wrongly recorded the same as 6.7.1961 in his High School Certificate nor it was his case that the Principal of the institution has forwarded his form with incorrect date of birth. It was not the case of Sri Ramesh Chandra Verma that the date of birth mentioned in his application form was 6.7.1953 while the Board has wrongly recorded the same as 6.7.1961 in his High School Certificate nor it was his case that the Principal of the institution has forwarded his form with incorrect date of birth. Therefore, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Secretary as well as Examination Committee could not have interfered nor could have corrected the date of birth of the petitioner on the fact stated in the alleged decision of the Examination Committee more so when the office of the Board had repeatedly noted that the date of birth of Respondent No. 4, as noticed in the High School Certificate, was correct as per the records of the Board. 15. This Court may record that the date of appointment in a private institution has absolutely nothing to do with the correction of the date of birth, as is corrected in the High School Certificate, which is based on the documents forwarded by the student himself, duly signed by him and countersigned by the Principal of the institution. It may also be stated that the petitioner had appeared as a private candidate in the High School Examination and therefore his examination form was not based on any documents of the institution itself. He himself had notified the date of birth in the examination form. 16. As noticed above, authorities of the Board were repeatedly informed that correction after 22 years is barred by the provisions and is not required. Absolutely no reasons have been assigned for waiver of the period prescribed, for entertaining the application for correction. The reason recorded by the Examination Committee to the effect that early date recorded was an impossibility, as the candidate had been employed earlier in a private institution, is only an attempt to justify the illegal acts of the authorities themselves, inasmuch as in normal course of things it cannot be presumed that person concerned had obtained appointment only after attaining majority or that he had provided his correct date of birth at the time of induction into service. 17. It is an accepted fact that appointments in private institutions are offered even prior to the date the candidate attains the age of majority. 17. It is an accepted fact that appointments in private institutions are offered even prior to the date the candidate attains the age of majority. There was no material before the Examination Committee to believe that the date of birth, as disclosed by Sri Ramesh Chandra Verma at the time he was offered appointment, was correct. 18. This Court may reiterate that all such exercise of correction in the date of birth, based on allegations regarding employment etc. in private institutions, are totally foreign and outside the scope of Regulation 7 of Chapter-Ill of Part 2-B of the regulations framed under the Intermediate Education Act, which only permits clerical mistakes to be corrected. 19. In the totality of the circumstances as noticed herein above, this Court is satisfied that the Secretary/Examination Committee of the Madhyamik Shiksha Parishad U.P., Allahabad have exceeded their legal authority, for reasons which are borne out from the records while passing illegal and arbitrary order for correction of the date of birth after 22 years of the issuance of High School Certificate. This Court cannot permit such acts to be perpetuated nor can it condone such mistakes. The Examination Committee/Secretary of the Madhyamik Shiksha Parishad U.P., Allahabad must necessarily be dealt with firmly. 20. Accordingly, the present writ petition is allowed. The order passed by the Madhyamik Shiksha Parishad U.P., Allahabad dated 28.2.2003 is quashed. A cost of Rs. 5000/- is imposed upon the Secretary of the Madhyamik Shiksha Parishad U.P., Allahabad at the relevant time. The cost so imposed must be deposited by the Secretary through a bank draft drawn in favour of Registrar General of this Court within one months from today. Failing which the District Magistrate, Allahabad shall ensure recovery of the said amount of Rs. 5,000/- as arrears of land revenue and shall transmit the money to the Registrar General. The cost so recovered shall be placed in the Accounts of Legal Aid Authority of this Court. The Registrar General of this Court is directed to forward a copy of this order to District Magistrate, Allahabad for necessary compliance. Report whereof be submitted within the time specified. ————